by Razor Sharp

Don’t drink the Kool Aid, kids. Sure, sure, every critic worth his or her pepper and salt is gushing all over this one. But they are wrong. Dead wrong.

Let me explain. Yes, Terrence Malick makes grand cinematic gestures. Yes, Terrence Malick makes films so infrequently, each and every release is cause for celebration. Yes Terrence Malick’s The Tree of Life won the prestigious Palme d’Or prize at the very prestigious Cannes Film Festival. That win seems to have spawned a Cannes-Do reaction.  Everyone agrees: this, indeed, is one fabulous film.

I disagree. It is one fabulous film all right, but it is also one plodding film, and one misguided head trip film. It’s three films. One good, two bad. Trouble is Malick put them all together, and you have to sit through 137 minutes to see the good one.

The good: an earthy portrayal of family life in post-war America, starring Brad Pitt as an ultra strict, morally sound father struggling to support his wonderful family. It’s a brilliant depiction of small town life, focusing on the growing pains and gains of his three boys. Great performances, super cinematography and a nuanced mood make for a superb piece of filmmaking.

The bad: we are jettisoned to present day where the grown up version of the eldest brother (an almost mute Sean Penn) does a lot of thinking, moping and vacant staring. You may be inclined to join him.

The ugly: the personal events presented so far are obliterated by an overblown, psychedelic assault, not unlike the colourful interlude in 2001: A Space Odyssey. Lots of big bang (the beginning and the end) stuff here, plus some CGI dinosaurs running about. Uh, yeah, you read that right. Apparently, humanity is really quite insignificant in the grand scheme of things, or something like that. There’s a bizarre reunion at the end that is the final nail on this coffin.

Should we really be celebrating something just because it has the audacity to tackle grand philosophical issues? I say no. And fire the editor!